Andrew Brown
English Argument 76100m
Sauer
12-6-96

Literacy, Motivation, and Economics

When the Times Educational Journal covered the National Commission on Education's report on the means by which Britain can improve its education, it stated that students, "need a grasp of literacy and basic skills...," and they "must want to learn"(Young i). This finding, although vague, does hit upon two very interesting points that are key in discussing the relationship of economics and literacy: to what extent do the literacy and motivation of a workforce affect their productivity and thus the economy of a country? There is a common belief that having a high literacy rate automatically results in a more productive society (Hull 21). In this paper, I will try to show that a higher motivation level (i.e. better work ethic) in both the schools and at work has a more significant effect on the economy than a high literacy rate. Towards that end, I will discuss Glynda Hull's essay "Hearing Other Voices: A Critical Assessment of Popular Views on Literacy and Work," in which she outlines some myths involved with literacy and job opportunities for people. Then I will go on to discuss the findings that indicate that many other industrial nations are surpassing the United States academically as well as economically, and I will try to explain how this relates to literacy and motivation. Finally, I will offer some suggestions on the path that the U.S. could take in views of these issues.

There has been a general trend recently to assume that any social or economic problem can be blamed on poor literacy rates (Hull 21). If literacy rates could be raised, then the country would be a more enlightened, productive country. In "Hearing Other Voices," Glynda Hull quotes Gerald Graff who called this phenomenon the "literacy myth" (28). She argues that this is not only a gross simplification, that it is in some cases untrue. She states dubiously that, "... because they apparently lack literacy and other 'basic skills,' U.S. workers can be held accountable for our country's lagging economy ...,"(21). The theory is that if people are more skilled in reading, writing, and other 'basic skills' then that will allow workers to be more productive. A fundamental problem, as Hull points out, is that the concept of 'basic skills' cannot easily be defined because requirements for jobs are always changing(25). For example, recently the use of computers and other electronic devices have become more commonplace in jobs that, before, did not require any technical knowledge(25). Hull tells a story of a girl that got a job at a bank because she cheated on the reading part of the application, but was completely capable of carrying out the requirements of the job once she was hired(43). Hull also challenges the necessity that all factory workers need to have high reading abilities. She tells the story of how a manufacturing company moved its factory from the United States to Bangkok for the sole purpose of saving money through less expensive labor. The people that were hired in Bangkok could not even speak the same language as the management (who were the same people as before the move), but the company continued to be profitable(37). Is literacy an absolute necessity for all workers, and does the lack of literacy always hurt profits? Apparently not. This makes sense simply because not all jobs involve information management and high level decision making.

Although blaming all the economic woes on literacy is an obvious exaggeration, it is important to point out that there are some significant losses due to human error that can be traced to illiteracy and lack of skills. Hull realizes this fact as well and states several examples. She relates a case where another manufacturing company switched to a more technical inventory system that the workers could not operate correctly; the mistakes eventually cost the business millions of dollars. Although this example is relatively severe, it would be a mistake to conclude that this kind of incident alone is the cause of the U.S. trade deficit. Consider: In Jonathan Kozol's book Illiterate America, he describes people who cannot read as having very little incentive to put themselves in situations that might expose their illiteracy. At the very beginning of his book he has a quote from an illiterate, "You have to be careful not to get into situations where it would leak out ..." (1). Therefore, if a job was known to require skills that a person did not have, he or she would tend not to apply for it. Of course, this is not a universal truth, and situations could always come up where an illiterate person is placed in such a position.

In 1987, U.S. News and World Report ran an article, written by Mary Lord, that showed that the United States was trailing other industrial countries such as West Germany and Japan on standardized tests that measured the mathematical and scientific abilities for people who just graduated high school. It also showed that the United State is losing its edge on scientific research and its lead in exporting(59). Lord focused particularly on Japan and the reason she gave for the performance discrepancy came in two parts. First, she attributes part of the success of Japan to the fact that it boasts a 99 percent literacy rate, and second she writes the rest of the difference is due to the incredible motivation and work ethic that is almost universal in Japan (58). She describes high school as lasting nine and a half hours a day plus additional homework time, and that school meets more than 240 times a year (more than twice the time of the U.S.)(58). I think most Americans would find this schedule to be excessively vigorous. Because of the large number of extra hours, and because of apparent, extreme motivation, the education that a Japanese student has when he or she graduates was estimated to be equivalent to a college education in the United States by Thomas Rahlens of Stanford University (58). So what is the difference between Japan and the United States that allows Japanese students to achieve much more than their counterparts? According to the article, a combination of high literacy rates and the willingness to spend much more time and effort doing work. I would argue that if a culture has achieved the latter, high motivation, then the former, a high literacy rate, would be a natural outgrowth of that work ethic. Is it plausible to think that if a person spent about half of every day doing school work (even in the summer) that the person could be anything but highly literate? It would seem not. Also, from the U.S. and News World Report article, countries that have high motivation also have high literacy rates in most cases (59). From this, it seems logical that literacy and motivation are correlated in some way. Now, consider that most people in the United States are literate (if only two thirds according to Kozol (4)) but most seem not to be highly motivated as compared to Japan. The proof of this is simply that the United States has a relatively high dropout rate, and our students and workers do not spend as many hours at school or at work as compared to other industrialized nations. Also, In the United States, those who are literate, we have shown, do not exhibit the same good work ethic as seen in Japan. Countries with relatively high motivation (i.e. good work ethic) have high literacy rates, but the converse (like the U.S) is not always true. From the above argument it can be inferred that literacy tends to be a result of increased motivation considerably more than the converse (i.e. literacy causes high motivation). We have concluded that what the United States needs to increase is economic output is not increased literacy per se (although it would be a by-product), but increased motivation and/or work ethic. This may seem like a lofty goal to set, to change the mindset of the entire country, and indeed it is.

I will not offer a solution to this country's lack of motivation for school and work. Instead, I will show that perhaps increased motivation and a more productive economy are not the only goals to keep in mind. An article from another U.S. News and World Report, written by James Fallows, stated that the government, as well as some private industries in Japan, were encouraging workers to take more time off for vacations and to work for fewer hours every day (The average number of days taken for summer vacation is four days in Japan)(13). Part of the reason for this is that the Japanese government was interested in becoming more of "Western" economy (i.e. a consumer economy) by buying some of the mass quantities of products that were normally exported elsewhere(13). Japanese people simply were not buying products that were made there. In August of 1986, there was a $287 million a day trade surplus for Japan(13). But for all this economic success, the people in Japan did not live in luxury. In fact, Fallows stated that there were almost no recreational facilities in Japan (as of 1986) and that the average house was "cramped" (13). The lifestyle of an average person in Japan was described as, "well below that of Europe" and the United States(13). So while the economy of Japan was booming, it was not benefiting the population. I do not believe that the United States suffers from a lack of consumerism, nor that we should encourage people to take more vacations. I simply wanted to show that although a weak economy does not add to the quality of life of a country, apparently being an "industrial giant" (Besser 873) does not necessarily promote generally happiness either.

We have seen that increased literacy, in general, is not the best way to stimulate the economy by pointing out the limitations of when skills involved in literacy (such as reading, writing, and the ability to use a computer) have only uses in some, but not all, job fields. Also, we have seen that motivation seems to be a better indicator of economic potential than literacy through a comparison of the United States and Japan. Finally we have seen Japan was so focused on work and productivity that the quality of life suffered for the Japanese as compared to some Western countries. The question becomes what is the correct balance of economic achievement and quality of life? This is a question that is beyond the scope of a single essay, but I would conjecture that since the United States is striving to have an economy more like Japan's and vise versa than the answer is probably somewhere between the two current philosophies.

Works Cited